Why can't the US adopt European-Style Social Systems?

  • Thread starter Thread starter RCIAGraduate
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Why would you get banned?

Anyway, it’s something that could be implemented at the State level, instead of a Federal imposition. The way I understand it, States have more jurisdiction to implement these sort of programs.

Being poor is always a relative thing. You can’t compare being poor in New York with being poor in Rutonde, Rwanda. In one, you need an substantially great income to afford housing… in the other you have dirt cheap housing… but also dirt cheap conditions… however people expect it to be so and accept it. The same conditions in New York would be considered inhumane.
 
Single payer health care would be a train wreck if we tried to implement it on such a huge, unhealthy population like we have. Even in the UK the NHS cannot keep up, I just read where they canceled ALL routine operations until February, over 50,000 people are now having to wait! And a few years ago when my SIL lived in Ireland and things were going well by their standards, she needed an MRI for an urgent problem. The wait was 3 months unless she paid over 1000 euros to go private and jump the queue, which she had to do. Ridiculous! These countries that have socialized medicine have a very small number of MRI, PET, CT etc’s as compared to their population, unlike the US. Their medical research and development isn’t as innovative, that’s why people from all over the world come here for treatments. Overall we and the whole world would be worse off if we changed to a European style system. As it is, no one can be turned down at a hospital regardless of ability to pay so poor people can actually receive prompt medical treatment if needed.
 
About Norway… since you mentioned it. Please also research on the web the actions of Barnevernet. As a Christian and Catholic. Barnevernet is a private organization headed in Sweden hired by the Norwegian government to do.what they do (dismantle families?). Switzerland is the golden country. Most gold is stored there, they cannot be an example of European countries since they are not fully part of EU (the riches will be rich). If you want to research average European social care programs look for Germany or France, or even Italy why not? A small yet rich country like.Switzerland is by no means an example that can emulated even if in theory yes, it should. But it can’t.
 
Monk’s right though. The “poor people” in USA are relatively well off.
The ones in the street are generally in the street because they have an addiction or a mental illness that interferes with them seeking the help they need, not because no help is available.

It doesn’t make it OK to not help the poor because they’re “less poor” in USA than they are in South America, Asia, Africa or even parts of Europe, but relatively speaking, I’d rather be “poor” by US standards than “poor” by a lot of other countries’ standards.
 
Last edited:
You don’t want to hear it and I don’t want to say it, so let it lie.
pocaracas said:
Anyway, it’s something that could be implemented at the State level, instead of a Federal imposition.
Click to expand...
Our States aren’t really comparable with foreign nations either, they suffer from similar problems I already outlined, they largely suffer from the ones I didn’t and won’t outline, and anyway, this isn’t a government solved issue.
pocaracas said:
You can’t compare being poor in New York with being poor in Rutonde, Rwanda.
Click to expand...
Yeah I know.
pocaracas said:
however people expect it to be so and accept it. The same conditions in New York would be considered inhumane.
Click to expand...
LOL
 
Last edited:
Actually, every morning when I pass by him I give him cash and pray for him.

This morning I gave him the last $2 in my wallet.
 
ChunkMonk said:
You don’t know a thing about me. You don’t know who I am, what I do, and with all your feelings I don’t think you could understand the first thing about me or Mr. Hobo so take that smarmy middle class liberal condescension and choke on it.
Click to expand...
Oh, IM the one with a condescending attitude?

I see how that works.

I wish you could see how your attitude is oh so far from the attitude of the Church.

You have expressed beliefs which are in direct contradiction to the Churches, and you consistently display an attitude which is utterly inimical to the Spirit of charity.

You’re blinded by your hatred for “liberals.”
 
Last edited:
It was every dollar in my pocket. It was enough to get a coffee in the middle of a blizzard.

Two men walked into a Church - one, a rich man, had $1,000 in his pocket, and put 5 hundred dollar bills into the collection. Another, a poor homeless man, had $1 in his pocket, and put that whole dollar in.

Do you know which one Jesus considers to have put more into the collection?
 
The charity level of this thread is spiraling out of control. Please keep this thread focused on the topic at hand and avoid unwarranted hostility and making things personal. We can discuss differing ideas in a civil manner.
 
While I had the same idea (using an emoticon), please do not encourage this.
 
I want to hear all your perspectives even if we disagree. But I do not like the direction this thread is taking.
 
First, my parents were not born here. The conditions they lived in would be considered horrendous by a good portion of the US population. They came here, got jobs, got married and had kids. I grew up in Detroit. By the year 2000, 70% of the population was on some form of assistance. Generations of parents and children on welfare existed. It became a dumping ground for the poor, the homeless and others. Yes, there are people who cannot work or work full time. However, instead of instituting programs where people are trained on the job or other ways for them to work, a lot of red tape or “it’s not my problem” thinking exists. I sometimes think the poor should be led by someone in authority and go door to door in neighboring wealthy suburbs.

Driving through Detroit, I see areas that look like they’ve been carpet bombed, and, 1,000 feet later, a wealthy suburb. And I’m not proposing that anyone be forced to give, just asked. In the really poor neighborhoods, people get by - somehow. They live - somehow. So, no need to talk about it, just realize that only a handful of choices exist for some. Help, even a little.
 
The US is very inefficient on healthcare, the World Health Organisation stats show this. That said, I don’t like the British model much either but it’s better than the US one, no offence.
 
Yeah, the British model is probably not the best one.
There are others… similar, but where each user gets to pay a fee for each service. It’s symbolic fee, but enough of a deterrent for hypochondriacs and other abusers, while not being costly for the population.
 
Basically you have three aspects, affordability, access and quality. The US has great quality and but poor access and affordability. The UK has great access and affordability but poor quality. France has great quality and access but poor affordability and so on.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top